CA judge argues community colleges' DEI mandates are flagrantly unconstitutional
Joseph-Nicolas Robert-Fleury: Galileo before the Holy Office. Image in Public Domain
Magistrate Judge Christopher Baker's new 44-page report advises that CA Community Colleges and Kern Community College District (both of which face a lawsuit from Bakersfield prof Daymon Johnson) stop requiring faculty to submit to DEI ideology. Judge Baker explains that mandating DEI/anti-racist “proficiency” really means forcing teachers to communicate a particular message, which blatantly opposes their First Amendment rights. From College Fix.
A California judge has issued a report that sides against California community college policies that require faculty to embrace diversity, equity and inclusion as part of their job.
Judge Christopher Baker recommended blocking California Community Colleges’ leaders and Kern Community College District trustees from enforcing mandatory diversity, equity and inclusion policies in a report issued this week in response to a lawsuit filed against the district by a professor.
The report has been billed as the possible “first step toward overturning statewide rules on DEI policies at California community colleges,” KGET reported.
Professor Daymon Johnson, a history professor at Bakersfield College, filed the lawsuit earlier this year after enduring a five-month administrative investigation for calling a peer a radical social justice warrior. Johnson alleged his First Amendment rights are being violated by the district, which oversees Bakersfield College.
Judge Baker appears to agree.
In his 44-page report, Baker rejected administrators’ arguments that the DEI regulations are just suggestions. He wrote that claim runs “contrary to the mandatory language of the regulations [that] requires faculty demonstrate (or progress toward) proficiency” in DEI for evaluations and tenure review.
The judge’s report added:
Similarly, § 53605(a) provides that “Faculty members shall employ teaching, learning, and professional practices that reflect DEIA and anti-racist principles, and in particular, respect for, and acknowledgement of the diverse backgrounds of students and colleagues to improve equitable student outcomes and course completion” (emphasis added).
Likewise, § 53605(c) provides that “[s]taff members shall promote and incorporate culturally affirming DEIA and anti-racist principles to nurture and create a respectful, inclusive, and equitable learning and work environment” (emphasis added). [The] characterization of these regulations as merely “articulat[ing] the aspirational goal” of promoting DEIA (Doc. 42 at 16-17) is disingenuous – by their plain language, the regulations require faculty members like Plaintiff to express a particular message.
The Supreme Court “[has] held time and time again that freedom of speech ‘includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.’”
This article originally appeared in the College Fix. Read the whole thing here.
Related:
Lawsuit claims UC's forced DEI alignment is “illegitimate,” discriminates against Asian faculty
Why six CA'n community college profs are fighting back against DEI statements
SJSU prof: DEI statements enable subjective, narrow-minded, “mini-me” screening
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.